1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 August 2017 b. Date Received: 24 August 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was falsely led to believe he would receive a rehabilitative transfer upon his release from military doctors. His chain of did not know how to deal with him, so they gave him an Article 15 for every little infraction to get him out of the military. His chain of command kept promising him a transfer, knowing that a transfer was not going to happen. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. However, the PTSD condition is not a likely cause of the misconduct. Therefore, a nexus between the PTSD condition and the misconduct is not likely. In personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 May 2010 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 May 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he wrongfully solicited SPC N.V.; he failed to go to his appointed place of duty on various occasions; and he disobeyed CPT. D.H. on various occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 May 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, although he was not entitled to a board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 May 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 January 2009 / 3 years, 17 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 years / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 1 year, 4 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 9 September 2009 to 27 October 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 19 January 2010, for wrongfully soliciting SPC N.V., to commit a violation, by impersonating a noncommissioned officer (30 December 2009); forfeiture of $378 pay (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Report, dated 24 March 2010, relates that the applicant was under investigation for damage to private property, on post CG Article 15, dated 24 March 2010, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (16 March 2010); reduction to PVT / E-1 (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days. On 30 March 2010, the suspension of punishment of reduction to PVT / E-1, was vacated for the new offense of without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (26 March 2010). Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 April 2010, revealed at the time of evaluation, there was no clinical indication that the applicant had a medically unfitting mental illness. He did not fail medical retention standards per AR 40-501, chapter 3-33. He is medically (psychiatrically) fit for duty and he did not require assessment by a medical evaluation board. He is competent (as defined by R.C.M. 909 (e)(2)) to understand and participate in any administrative process deemed appropriate by command. FG Article 15, dated 23 April 2010, for having received a lawful command from CPT. D.H., his superior commissioned officer, to be, restricted to the limits of the barracks, dining facility, place of duty, place of worship, medical and dental facilities for 14 days, or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same (31 March 2010); having received a lawful command from CPT. D.H., his superior commissioned officer, to obey a No Contact Order with B.S. set on 24 March 2010, or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same (31 March 2010); forfeiture of $723 pay for two months( suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days. On 6 May 2010, the suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $723 pay for two months was vacated for the new offenses of without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (29 April 2010); and having been restricted to the limits of 5/2 ID SBCT unit footprint, by a person authorized to do so, did break said restriction (29 April 2010). The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memorandum, Routine Command Directed Evaluation of the applicant, dated 8 January 2010, relates that the applicant reported having strong nightmares, stress and anxiety in situations reminding him of the incident (he becomes agitated when in contact with diesel fumes for instance). The incident may be affecting his marriage and ability to communicate and habitat with his wife. He is hesitant to re- deploy due to fears that his stress may flare up again. He continues to report to rear- detachment and execute daily duties assigned; however, he is not currently performing tasks associated with his primary MOS of 19D Cav Scout. Severity of condition led to unit Medevac'ing him from theater in Nov 2009 with an escort. Based on findings in this evaluation, the applicant was diagnosed with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (DSM IV TR 309.81). Report of Medical History, dated 22 March 2010, his physician revealed that the applicant was prescribed medication for PTSD and was being treated with medication by behavioral health for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application (four pages); counseling statement; and a sworn statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was falsely lead to believe he would receive a rehabilitative transfer upon his release from military doctors. AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements states, the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. The applicant further contends, his chain of did not know how to deal with him, so they gave him an Article 15 for every little infraction to get him out of the military. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. The applicant also contends, his chain of command kept promising him a transfer, knowing that a transfer was not going to happen. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20170012870 1